The Phantom of the Opera (November 14th, 2015)

The Phantom of the Opera

November 14th, 2015

Matinee

Another trip to Phantom! I've been at the Royal Opera House so much that it felt a bit weird to be back in my old haunt. It's not quite the same as I've been sitting in the Grand Circle (cheaper seats!) rather than stalls, but still. Anyway, I finally got around to seeing the new principal Christine Celinde Schoenmaker, and also managed to catch a few new covers on, so it made for an interesting show. I don't have too many comments on the show itself as I was mostly focusing on the performers, so I've divided the review into sections based on performer. Enjoy!

Seat/Venue Review: I sat A21 in the Grand Circle, and it was £51. Overall quite a good seat. You have to lean forward a bit, but you can see everything on the stage happening. You miss a few details being farther away, but I think it's a good value for what you get. The only thing I hate about the GC is the lack of bathrooms. Also the staff get quite snippy if you want to check the cast board before going up to the GC. 

John Owen-Jones

John Owen-Jones
(program scan by Viscountess on Tumblr)

Love him! Really, really adore his Phantom. But I couldn't for the life of me tell you why. He's basically an all-around amazing Phantom. The voice is fabulous (I've never heard a Phantom get applause mid-song, but JOJ totally deserved it. His voice is like listening to melting caramel), his acting is interesting and engaging, and his very presence on stage is just *drool*. I'm kind of sparse on details because I can't actually tell you specific little things I liked or disliked about his Phantom, I just loved it all. Off the top of my head, I like how he turns the end of the title song into a bit of a music lesson (he's 'conducting' Christine with his hands), and I like how he's not overly violent in the Final Lair. You get the sense that there's some intense crazy under the calm, smooth exterior, but it doesn't pop out much. I also love how he does the Italian accent (mimicking Piangi) in PONR; it's a cool little detail that makes the setup and Christine's reaction far more believable. I also like that he expresses his emotions with his whole body; it's not confined to just his face/hands. It's kind of hard to explain, but it's like watching a dancer (like Matthew Golding in R&J) rather than someone just 'acting'. Anyway, JOJ is amazing and such a treat to watch. 

Celinde Schoenmaker

I wanted to like her. I so badly wanted to like her, because I adored her Fantine, and I thought it was amazing that someone really different from the typical casting was playing Christine. But I was unfortunately quite disappointed by her. 

Celinde Schoenmaker
(tumblr)

Let me start by saying: Celinde's voice is glorious. Her Think of Me Cadenza was the most mind-blowing thing I've ever heard. It was a much richer, deeper sound than your typical Christine. Though her voice is beautiful, I thought she over sung the part (and Harriet Jones was guilty of this early in her run too). She goes all out and sings literally everything. Even lines that are usually spoken, she sings. Because of this, she misses opportunities to express her emotions in her voice (true, she could do this while singing, but she doesn't). Her performance was so vocally-centered, that there was very little character development; nothing really emotionally engaging about her performance. I'm re-reading this and it's making no sense, but she just sings stuff. She doesn't feel it, and that shows in her voice. I also struggled with her accent quite a bit (which was odd because I didn't even notice it as Fantine); it was very thick. She was still understandable, but it seemed as though she was having a difficult time trying to hide the accent, the result being that any time she spoke/sung, it just sounded awkward. I expect she will become more comfortable with this in time.
I was also quite put off by her acting. It was just uncomfortable to watch. It was very much "I'm doing the choreography and blocking that was given to me," and therefore came off as rehearsed rather than natural. It didn't feel 'in the moment'. Some of her acting choices didn't make a lot of sense to me; she seemed far too excited about the Phantom appearing in her mirror (ok, this could make sense if you think about it, but I didn't get it at the time) and was really smiley and twitchy during MOTN. I heard others call it 'Orgasm acting' (a la Gina Beck) - I'm not sure I'd go that far, but it certainly looked off. She also never really got emotional with her face. I mean, she'd frown or smile, but otherwise kept a pretty neutral expression. I couldn't tell you what Christine was feeling at any given moment, and I can't say anything about how her character developed through the show, because it didn't. There's not a whole lot to say here… just disappointing. I loved her acting as Fantine and was expecting such an interesting, emotional Christine.
The one part of her performance that I unexpectedly loved was the second half of the Final Lair; it seemed that she finally let herself go, and went all out emotionally. Face, voice, movements - everything felt less choreographed and more natural. If she could do the whole show like that, she'd be incredible. From "Tears of Hate", she was just on FIRE! I also loved her "Angel of music, you DECEIVED ME!" etc. She just completely broke down, and it showed in her face, voice, and body (everything about her just collapsed inwards). After that line, she just started gasping, and looked very distressed. It was so effective, and demonstrated that she is more than capable of delivering an emotional performance.  The other time I felt like this was at the very beginning of PONR, when she was playing with the Apple. It felt as though she was actually having fun and playing around, rather than rigidly performing choreography. So yeah, let yourself go Celinde!

Nadim Namaan and Celinde Schoenmaker
(program scan by Viscountess on Tumblr)

Mostly, I feel like Celinde's being held back by trying to be the stereotypical vulnerable, delicate Christine. Whether that's her choice or the directors, I don't know. But she's never going to be a delicate, childlike, innocent Christine. She doesn't have the voice or the look to pull that off. However, she absolutely could be a more mature, fierce, badass Christine (a la Olivia Brereton). I mean, yes, there are essential moments of vulnerability. But it's so much more effective to play a really fierce Christine who has multiple layers, including a vulnerable layer which shows through during All I Ask of You, Final Lair, Wishing, etc.). This could be so effective if she just was allowed to portray it that way. Anyway, I've got my fingers crossed. Celinde's got a fabulous Christine inside of her, I'm just hoping we'll get to see it some day. 

Nadim Namaan

Not my favourite performance of his. I felt like he didn't gel very well with Celinde; they didn't seem like close friends or a couple. His usual protectiveness wasn't there, possibly because Celinde's Christine is much more mature and doesn't really need a protector as much. So I think he could've adjusted slightly, but since Celinde doesn't really know what she's doing character wise, Nadim didn't have a lot to work with. So I'll forgive it. Not much to say other than that, but he still had some really good moments as Raoul. "Cease this torment!" in Wandering Child Trio was very passionate, very believable. I love his acting in this scene; he speaks with such conviction and power - making a sometimes ridiculous scene actually mean something. Nadim does a great job at communicating Raoul's fiercer side without going overboard. Loved when he was in the noose; he was really struggling against it and fighting. I loved his, "Christine, forgive me, please forgive me," too. Definitely communicating that it wasn't her fault they'd ended up in this situation, or apologising for not being able to save her/listen to her sooner. Depends on your perception of Raoul. But I liked it.
All in all, great voice, powerful singer (you can always hear him properly), decent acting. I still love his Raoul, just not quite as blown away as the first time I saw him.

Lyndsey Gardiner

Lyndsey Gardiner
(operafantomet tumblr)

Story time! Back when I saw Phantom in London the first few times, there was a swing (I'd just learned what a swing was so I liked to try to spot them) that I really, really liked. She put her own unique little stamp on every ensemble character she played, even if said character was only onstage for 6 seconds. It felt like she put a lot of effort and thought into what she was doing, and that made her very entertaining to watch. A while later, I found out that said swing had been promoted to 2nd cover Carlotta! Whoop! Only… I never got to see her (I had the 1st cover Carlotta a lot, which was great because I loved her, but I still wanted to see said favourite swing). So, a year+ and a cast change later, I finally got to see my favourite swing as Carlotta! And it was so worth the wait.
Lyndsey's Carlotta was so delightfully funny, obnoxious, fierce - I could go on for a while. She really made the character her own, and it wasn't an interpretation that seemed copied from anyone else - very fresh and unique. She had a solid, believable accent, and a voice to die for. She wasn't too shrill or 'throaty' as some Carlottas can get; it was a very solid, clear sound, with just a touch of pomp and a 'look how wonderful I can be' air about it. I really liked that she kept the Italian accent consistent through the singing/speaking/etc. - a lot of Carlotta's tend to drop it when they're singing (after TOM).
My favourite part about Lyndsey's Carlotta had to be the acting. She was so charismatic and engaging; I couldn't take my eyes off of her. t loved how she said "She's mad," in Notes II; it sounded very snobby, frank, and high-schooler-ish, which was funny. Never heard anyone go for that angle before. I can't exactly put it into words, but I found her Carlotta so much fun to watch. Little details in her interactions with the other characters established a solid diva-esque personality, her little rants and emotional outbursts were over the top, yet entirely believable simply because she put the effort into thoroughly establishing her character. I really, really loved her as Carlotta, and I don't think this review does her justice. As with JOJ, I just loved everything she did, and it's difficult to put my finger on a few specific things that made her portrayal so enjoyable.

Basically at this point I'm just annoyed that after how much I liked her, I doubt I'll see her as Carlotta again (it was difficult enough to see her once!). I have a checklist for Carlotta, and Lyndsey checked all the boxes, and then some! She's an amazing, entertaining, and feisty Carlotta, and I totally recommend going to see her if you get the chance. Also, I feel like she'd make a really interesting Christine… she's got the right look for it, and I'd love to see her act something like that as I really thought she put her own stamp on Carlotta. I'd completely support her being the new cover Christine after Lisa's promoted (I mean, I doubt that'd happen, but I'd love to see it). 

Daisy Hulbert

Daisy Hulbert
(picslist.com)

I was very unpleasantly surprised by just how awful Daisy's Meg was. I liked watching her in the ensemble and thought she was a nice and interesting dancer, and I fully expected her to be a decent Meg. I was so wrong. She was embarrassingly bad. I'm surprised anyone let her on stage. In Hannibal, she was trying far too hard to stand out. A beat ahead of everyone, making ridiculous faces, movements not flowing… not pretty. Also, sickled foot! Argh. Even Celinde managed to keep her foot straight, whereas when Daisy's foot was on the floor, it was so turned in I don't know how she didn't hurt herself. Anyway, I wasn't impressed.

I'd heard her sing some stuff before, and I didn't think much of her voice, so I wasn't expecting too much from her vocally. I figured it'd be mediocre at best. I wish she'd been mediocre. Her singing voice was so bad I don't even know how to describe it (my friend described it as a drugged gerbil if that's any help…). Cringeworthy comes to mind. Squeaky. Wobbly. Babyish. Rodent-esque (my hamster made more pleasant noises than her, to be completely honest). Take your pick. It was just.. awful. I'm making faces just thinking about it. I mean, I think she was hitting the notes… sort of… she totally missed them on "the words aren't yours!" though (oh my goodness that was painful to listen to). I guess there's not much else to say about her singing, because I think I'm just ranting now. But it really was unpleasant. They could've used her Angel of Music as some form of torture. I mean, she couldn't even sing "Christine!" without sounding all warbly and shrill. There was no smoothness in her voice (forgive my lack of terminology; I'm a gymnast, not a singer). 

The one thing that wasn't awful was her acting. It wasn't to my taste, certainly. At times it was way over the top, whereas other times she faded into the background. But she seemed to be going for a very childlike approach, and she at least communicated that well. Did I like it? Nope. Did she make a choice and commit to it? Yep. So I'll give her that. But I really have no desire to see the atrocity that is this Meg onstage every again.  

General

The ensemble was weirdly sparse (illness/holiday I assume?); it looked as though a few female ensemble were missing, I spotted at least one male swing on, and there were at least two ballet girls missing (plus Daisy on for Meg), and no male dancer. It looked rather odd watching Daisy and Lily essentially partnering themselves in Il Muto. Unfortunately, no matter how good those girls are, it was very obvious that there were people missing. And I have to say, this group of girls don't gel nearly as well as the last cast (which is weird because it's almost all the same… I guess Layla being gone and Georgia and Danielle missing has a significant impact). Everyone was slightly off time with each other, nothing looked as tight and clean as it usually is.

The Royal Ballet: Mixed Program (November 10th, 2015)

The Royal Ballet's

Viscera

& 

Afternoon of a Faun

&

Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux

&

Carmen

Nov. 10th, 2015

This was a mixed program featuring a brand new ballet. I saw what was apparently the 'B' cast (thank you guy sitting next to me), but I'm positive that in most cases, they were every bit as good as the A cast must be. Certainly there were performances that were so perfect I couldn't see anyone else doing them. I've divided the review into brief thoughts on each piece in the order in which they were performed. Enjoy!

Seat/Venue Review: I sat C25 in the Stalls Circle, and it was a £33 day seat. Not a bad seat. A bit annoying when one of the pieces heavily focused their choreography on an area of the stage I couldn't see. I didn't get in late, but they'd already run out of cast sheets, which was annoying. 

Viscera

(flickr)

Viscera, choreographed by Liam Scarlett, included a large ensemble of dancers, featuring Fumi Kaneko, Leticia Stock, and Nehemiah Kish. The 23 minute ballet was divided into three parts; a large group number, a PDD, and a second group number. I can't really tell you anything about any particular dancers, as it was too quick to pick out individual faces/styles. I think I spotted Olivia Cowley, and there was one blonde dancer (usually in the front) who had atrocious hands/wrists, but aside from that, I can't identify any dancers (not including the PDD), so I'll speak about the piece as a whole.

I found the choreography quite chaotic. It looked like it could've used a bit more rehearsal; many of the synchronised parts had one or two dancers a beat in front or behind of everyone else. In some areas, this was clearly intentional, in others, not so much. Overall, it was pretty sloppy. The PDD was nice enough, I didn't find anything particularly noteworthy about either of the dancers. It felt like they were doing their job, and that was that. Both strong dancers, of course, but I thought there was more they could've done expression wise to communicate the meaning of whatever they were dancing. As it was, I have no clue what they were talking about.

I also had a bit of a problem with the costumes. The three types of costumes (two for girls and one for boys) were just different enough to clash quite noticeably. The colours and styles (tight, square necks for the girls and baggy cowl necks for the guys) just didn't go together; deep red and plum aren't complementary. I suppose they were pretty traditional, contemporary ballet costumes, but I thought a little more thought could've gone into how the costumes looked onstage with each other.

I did enjoy watching Viscera, I just felt that it was an unfinished product that had been thrown onstage before it was totally ready. The choreography was chaotic and not exactly memorable, and many lovely dancers just faded into the messy background. 

Afternoon of a Faun

Olivia Cowley
(© @damegrace on Twitter)

This 11-minute Jerome Robbins piece featured two dancers, Olivia Cowley and Matthew Ball, and was probably my favourite piece of the evening. While the name is a bit nonsensical (aside from Cowley's pseudo-grecian tunic, nothing is remotely greco-roman about it), it's a simple, yet enjoyable performance. It tells a brief story of two dancers in a ballet studio, in which the audience is the mirror. The unnerving thing about this idea is that the dancers are looking right at the audience, yet you know that they're looking at a reflection. The head tilts and subtle movements make this very clear. It's a cool idea, and Cowley and Ball execute it to perfection.

The choreography and performance felt very classical with a modern edge to it, shown through the costume and set. There were no fancy tricks; rather, it focused on the relationship between two dancers. It was a piece that was quietly elegant without being overly complex; very clean, very light and airy. Ball was charming and engaging; his little warm up routine at the beginning was very realistic. Aside from the heavy makeup, it didn't look like he was performing on stage. However, Olivia Cowley stole the performance for me. She's such a gorgeous dancer, with lines and extensions to die for and the most beautiful stage presence. Her dancing and the music felt like they were the linked together so absolutely that I can't imagine one without the other; she really connects to the music, her partner, and the audience in a way very few dancers do. She's living it, rather than performing it (does that make sense?); it's incredibly effective, and makes her a joy to watch.

I've read other reviews that suggested a heavy sexual undertone of the piece, which I didn't see. To me, it was more about childlike innocence, beautiful clean lines and simple, yet elegant steps. It was like watching a waterfall at sunrise (imagery much?); peaceful, yet transfixing. I could've sat and watched it go on for hours.

Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux

Lauren Cuthbertson and Matthew Golding
(roh.org)

This Balanchine piece featured principal dancers Lauren Cuthbertson and Matthew Golding. I'm typically not a Balanchine fan; I find his choreography frenetic and lacking in flow or rhythm. However, I did quite enjoy this piece (mostly because of the dancers, but I loved the music too). Lauren Cutbertson is always radiant (although slouching off the stage after a turning section before she's actually out of view of the audience wasn't one of her finer moments - I always find things like that disappointing because she was executing these beautiful, quick turns with such precision and finesse… and then she just stopped bothering before she was off stage. It kind of ruined the moment). But her footwork is quick and tidy, complemented by an elegant port de bras. I felt that she made the best of the choreography; she kept it light and spritely while maintaining her usual fluidity and expression. I really enjoyed Matthew Golding in this piece too. He's a very expressive, emotive dancer, but this gave me a chance to watch his actual dancing a bit more than I did at R&J. Great lines and extension, rock solid turns, very sharp, hit all the accents in the music and choreography easily. I really liked that he's got gorgeous presentation, but will draw your attention to his partner; if you're watching him, it's like he finishes his thing, then slowly extends his arm and head in the direction of Lauren so you follow his gaze right to her. It's hard to explain, but very effective. Pairs skaters/Ice Dancers - take note! My one complaint about him is he tends to 'eat an air donut' quite a lot (basically 'biting' the air while dancing… a lot of dancers and figure skaters seem to do this; it just looks a bit awkward). So, although I'm not a Balanchine fan, the expression and technical ability of Golding and Cuthbertson made this piece entertaining and entrancing. I would happily watch it over and over again. 

Carmen

Marianela Nunez and Matthew Golding
(roh.org)

A new work by Carlos Acosta, featuring a mix of ballet and opera, starred Tierney Heap as Carmen, Vadim Muntagirov as Don Jose, and Matthew Ball as Escamillo. This was the second Acosta-choreographed piece I've seen, and I can't say I'm a fan of his work. It's chaotic, nonsensical, fails to communicate a story… essentially, this version of Carmen was a glorified striptease. I honestly don't know why the Royal Ballet continues to pour money into Acosta's choreography, as it's clearly not been successful thus far (this based on my personal opinion and on other reviews). There was more making out between characters and stripping off of clothes than actual dancing, which was disappointing and unnecessary. The opening consisted of a group of men removing clothing bit by bit as Carmen danced around seductively. Subtle, real subtle. In the middle of the ballet, there was a table prop, and a dancer was put front and centre simply to strip off her top/vest, then jump back down again. These kinds of things happened frequently, and they detracted from the story, leaving a confused mess of props and clothes. I also felt the ballet was far too highly sexualised. In many cases, implication is more effective than actually showing what was happening. Drawn out kisses, dancers rolling around on top of each other, and awkwardly positioned lifts made the piece decidedly un-sexy - any charm or seductiveness that the dancers achieved was cancelled out by the above. 

That is not to say the dancing itself wasn't good. It was clear that Heap and Ball were putting everything into their characters. Heap was sultry and daring; every inch of her screamed seductress through the ballet, yet she was capable of showing the character's more emotional side when confronted with her own demise. Ball was charming and suave as Escamillo, you could see exactly why Carmen was drawn to his intriguing nature. There wasn't a whole lot of actual dancing on his part, but Ball managed to express the character's personality while tidily executing what little dancing he had been given to do. Muntagirov was a bit awkward and muted; he faded into the background very easily, and I didn't see the psychological break that has to happen for Don Jose to murder Carmen. 

Marienala Nunez and Carlos Acosta
(roh.org)

Another thing I liked was the opera chorus. They sang one full song (accompanying Ball's matador -esque introductory routine) and provided some background singing at other times. It added an interesting dynamic to an art that is usually silent aside from the orchestra, providing some depth and a connection to the most famous version of Carmen. I did think the fortune teller could have been played by a ballet dancer rather than sung. In this case, the singing felt cumbersome and unnecessary.

Carmen was a disappointing way to end an otherwise interesting and engaging mixed program. I hope that this ballet will be put aside for a while, or at least go back to the drawing board and reworked into a stronger, more coherent piece. I would certainly be willing to give it another shot if it were reworked. 

This quadruple bill presented by the Royal Ballet is certainly worth seeing, although it disappoints in some areas. Afternoon of a Faun and Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux are beautiful, engaging pieces, and Viscera, though chaotic, is intriguing nonetheless.  

The Royal Ballet: Romeo and Juliet (November 5th, 2015)

The Royal Ballet's

Romeo and Juliet

Nov 5th, 2015

This was my second time seeing The Royal Ballet's version of Romeo and Juliet, and I enjoyed it far more this time. There are certain things that I still wasn't feeling and details I felt were missing, but all in all, this was a better performance of the ballet, which made me like the ballet itself much more than the first time I saw it.

Seat/Venue Review: I sat in C87 Stalls Circle Right, and it was a £35 day seat. It was ok; it's probably the best of the bench seats, but you miss all the action that happens on the far side of the stage, and there's a lot of adjusting around to compensate for other people. ROH is nice as always. Friendly staff, easy to get around. My one issue is the lack of bathrooms on the right side of the theatre. And the exorbitant program costs, but at least they give free cast sheets.

This trip to the ROH was a spontaneous "friends are going and everyone says this girl playing Juliet is amazing so I should go check it out" trip. And boy am I glad I went. I've already talked about the production/set/costumes in my last review here, so now I mostly want to talk about the dancers and this particular performance itself.

Matthew Golding and Francesca Hayward
(The Guardian)

Matthew Golding (Canadian! Whoop!) and Francesca Hayward played the title characters. I really, really liked Matthew Golding. He has a very Prince Charming-esque character about him. It totally doesn't hurt that he's quite good looking (and has the Disney Prince hair), but it's mostly in the acting and his relationship with other characters. Golding believably portrayed a wide range of emotions, from cheeky and fun-loving around his friends, to head-over-heels, passionately in love with Juliet, to complete devastation at the death of his friend, to desperation and betrayal at Juliet's 'death'…. and then everything in between. I was so wrapped up in his emotional execution that I really couldn't tell you a whole lot about his dancing. Really nice lines with great legs and feet, big jumps, neat turns - but really, it's the emotions and the feeling that made Golding's performance truly unique and interesting. I wasn't entirely sold on the partnership of Hayward and Golding; she's tiny, and he's very tall, so it looked a bit awkward at times (though he certainly had no problems lifting her, he had to hunch all the way over - with her up en pointe - for the kisses, which looked slightly creepy). Though individually they were both strong emotional dancers, as a pairing I just didn't feel a lot of chemistry.

Francesca Hayward as Juliet
(roh.org)

Francesca Hayward was the dancer I've been hearing about for months. Everyone I've talked to has spoken of how wonderful she is, how Juliet is the perfect part for her, etc. That's a lot to live up to, so I was trying not to expect anything too exceptional, especially considering how young Hayward is. Well, she completely lived up to - and then exceeded - the hype. Hayward's Juliet was spritely and charming in the beginning, complete with light-as-a-feather jumps. The nuances and details in the introduction to the character immediately drew you in. Through the ballet, Hayward evolved from the youthful, happy child, to the young woman in love, to the absolute devastation that comes over Juliet by the end. It was a believable development, and you could tell Hayward had put a lot of thought and emotion into her performance. One of my favourite parts was watching Juliet interact with Paris; Hayward started out playfully trying to avoid him, before realising that her parents weren't going to let her get around it, after which she became more dour and unwilling to get too close to him. I like that the emotion the character is feeling extends to every part of her body - face, head, arms, torso, legs - her whole body tells the story. It's not just dancing with the feet, it's with the heart. I can't really comment on Hayward's technique as I was far too focused on her overall performance, but her dancing has a very airy quality. She landed her leaps soundlessly, and the intricate footwork looked precise, yet was executed with apparent ease. Her 'rag doll' at the end - when Juliet is supposedly dead - was perfect; she was entirely limp, and even when being dragged around the floor and tossed around (which according to her, hurts - I'm not surprised), not a muscle twitches. One could truly believe her to be dead. All in all, Hayward was a stellar Juliet. Though very young, she proved herself to be capable of handling the technical and emotional demands of the part better than many seasoned principal dancers. An exquisite young star that we can expect great things from.

Other notable performances came from Marcelino Sambe as Mercutio; from the moment he stepped on stage, you knew who he was. He was cheeky, charming, and delightfully humorous. He captured your attention instantly, which made it quite sad when he died. Last time I saw this ballet at ROH, I had no idea which dancer was Benvolio and which Mercutio until Tybalt killed one of them. The Three Harlots were hilarious; they have little routines in the background choreographed so they're always bugging someone, fighting, waving their skirts around, etc. It's fun to watch. And of course, my favourite part was in the background of the first scene, when a fight erupts in the market place. Way in the back, one guy was beating another guy up with a fake fish. You don't get much better than that.

Lauren Cuthbertson and Edward Watson
(the Guardian)

My one issue with this performance was that I felt it could've used a bit more rehearsal. The corps parts were fine, but some of the duos/trios (i.e. a Romeo/Benvolio/Mercutio trio near the beginning had the three dancers completely off time with each other for most of the trio). It just felt a bit disconnected, dancers focusing more on their individual performance rather than staying with the group (an 'ensemble of individuals' as someone else put it). I didn't quite feel a bond between any of the characters.

I really enjoyed this performance of Romeo and Juliet, and I wish I could go back and watch it again. If you get the opportunity to watch any of the dancers discussed in the review, do so. It's absolutely worth it. 

The Royal Ballet: Raven Girl & Connectome (October 22nd, 2015)

The Royal Ballet's

Raven Girl

& 

Connectome

Oct. 22nd, 2015

I had the pleasure of seeing these two ballets as a treat for myself to celebrate the end school (for now, anyway!). Originally I'd planned on going on Saturday, but the allure of  seeing Lauren Cuthbertson live was too much, so at 8am, I arrived at the ROH to grab a day ticket (of course, no one else showed up til 930, but still I got a cheap return, which was an excellent seat). This review will be divided in two sections, one for each ballet. I have also been asked by some people to review seats/venues in my reviews, so I'll do that first.

Seat/Venue Review: I sat A99 in the Stalls Circle Right, and it was £24. Definitely the best seat I've sat in at the ROH thus far, you could see 95% of the stage, and there were no heads or other obstructions in front of me. It's so close you're practically on the stage. I did get a slightly sore neck from having it turned the entire time, and the light from the orchestra was distracting at times, but it was an excellent seat, especially considering the price. Would definitely sit there again. As always, the ROH is a great venue, though the programs are very overpriced and they only sell them in the lobby.

Raven Girl

Sarah Lamb and Eric Underwood
© Dave Morgan

Raven Girl featured Sarah Lamb as the titular character, Edward Watson as the Postman, Olivia Cowley as the Raven, Paul Kay as 'Boy', Thiago Soares as the Doctor, Poppy Downing as a Raven Child (a role which I didn't even notice…), and Eric Underwood as the Raven Prince. They were supported by Hannah Grennell, Sander Blommaert, Marcelino Sambe, and Artists of the Royal Ballet.

The basis of the story is a raven and a postman fall in love (yes, you read that right), and have a child, the Raven Girl. This half-girl, half-bird looks human, but cannot speak, and longs for wings. Despite what other reviewers had said, I thought the narrative itself was relatively simple to follow. I'd read a basic summary beforehand, and that's all I needed to keep track of what was happening. To be fair, the actual narrative was interspersed with some bizarre group dances, and the conclusion came out of nowhere and made very little sense, but all in all, I didn't have a problem with it. I assume the group numbers were to cover up changes in set or mark the passage of time, but it felt a little random.

I had mixed feelings about the sets. Some of the set pieces were stunning; the rocky backdrop of the Raven's cave was incredibly effective, as were the large glass box which held the wings. But some things, like the window that moved around a lot, and some of the smaller set pieces (like the door at the beginning and other bits of chairs, chalkboards, etc.) felt awkward and out of place. I was also incredibly irritated by the text on the screen; it took an eternity to show up (it began with a series of random letters appearing and flickering until they reached the intended words), and this didn't really add anything, so it felt unnecessary. I liked to consistency of colour in the set though; everything was grey, black, and white. Costuming was hit and miss, and the lack of consistency bothered me - if the prince is meant to be a raven, where's his headpiece? And where did Raven Girl's wings go? I understand practicality, but if they knew they wanted to do this dance with the two of them, why didn't they consider this in the overall costume design, rather than changing everything for the last piece? I think that's part of what made the last dance between Raven Girl and the Prince feel so disconnected from everything else. I also didn't really like the floppiness of the raven costumes as it was distracting; I felt they could've been more effectively designed. The headpieces were awesome though.

Sarah Lamb and Eric Underwood
(google)

I have to admit, I didn't really pay attention to most of the male dancers. Partially because the characters portrayed by the girls were more intriguing, and partially because I tend to watch them more closely anyway so I can learn from them, and apply whatever I've learned to my own dancing. So I can tell you that Eric Underwood had extreme control, but lacked any emotional connection and wasn't particularly interesting. Edward Watson was charming and believable as the Postman, but he certainly didn't look comfortable with the partnering with the Raven; he was hauling her around and grimacing all the while. The 'Boy' didn't do any actual dancing as far as I noticed, he was more of a prop. I thought it was interesting that the ensemble of ravens was made up of both male and female dancers; if I weren't sitting so close, the two would've been indistinguishable. Usually the men and women have such different styles and ways of movement.

Sarah Lamb was lovely as the Raven Girl. I felt that this was a better part for her than Juliet; it was more wild and free, and it allowed her to explore a character that was very unique in that it's not something that really exists in other ballets (aside from maybe Swan Lake). However, I did feel that at times, she forgot she was playing a character and was like "Ok, now I dance." This was most noticeable during the partnering with the Raven Prince at the end; I didn't feel there was an opportunity for these two characters to develop a relationship, so they were more sort of dancing for themselves and putting on a performance rather than 'living' it. That said, Sarah has beautiful lines and gorgeous feet. I still felt as though her jumps were quite heavy (how can such a small, slim person land so loudly?), but she was very confident in the hoops and climbing up the chairs. I also felt she handled the awkwardly huge wings with ease, which had to be difficult (they didn't look light). My favourite part of her performance was how flawlessly she portrayed drugged/asleep; she was being dragged around and manipulated into various positions, and managed to maintain beautifully pointed feet and legs, graceful movement, etc without actually looking like she was still in control of her body. It was very intriguing and incredibly well done. Actually, she did this very well as Juliet too. So she's just really good at playing dead.

Olivia Cowley and Edward Watson
© Dave Morgan

I have to write about Olivia Cowley, because she was one of the highlights of the piece. From about 10 seconds into her first appearance onstage, I knew she was going to be the one to watch. She truly embodied the character of the Raven in everything she did; the constant rapid head movements, her arms and legs bending and moving exactly how a bird would - it's difficult to describe, and has to be seen to be truly appreciated. But you didn't see a trained dancer, you saw a wild, frenetic-yet-elegant bird. Her elegance and finesse made the sometimes awkwardly choreographed partner work look so much better. Olivia's acting, too, was just sublime. I'm always amazed how dancers manage to act without saying a work, but they have the advantage of facial expression - Olivia did all the work without her face, and produced twice the result of most dancers. You could see what her character was thinking and feeling just through head tilts and arm movements, such as when the Raven Girl got wings and her mother and father were upset by it, yet you could see the tenderness and love in the 'mothers' movement (I'm so not doing Olivia justice here). I also loved her dancing by itself. She has the most beautiful extensions (I want legs like hers!), and there's a very light, airy, and fluid quality about everything that she does. An all-around stellar dancer who I will definitely be making a point of seeing dance again. She absolutely needs to dance Juliet in R&J, and based on her ability to play a bird with such finesse, the Odette/Odile in Swan Lake. 

Connectome

The cast of Connectome featured Lauren Cuthbertson in the lead role, with Steven McRae and Edward Watson as the leading men. They were supported by a corps of men, including Luca Acri, Matthew Ball, Tomas Mock, and Marcelino Sambe.

© Dave Morgan

I'd heard mainly negative or neutral reviews of this piece, so I wasn't expecting much. I don't know what those reviewers were thinking, however, because I loved it! To be fair, any theme/storyline went completely over my head. I had no idea what the piece was meant to be about or what it was trying to convey (I believe it had something to do with identity/connections between people? Who knows). At the same time though, I found it intriguing to watch.

The set - a series of long poles - was very intricate, yet didn't feel overcrowded or 'too much'. The choreography was such that the dancers moved through the poles with grace and ease, and it added a sense of dimension to the overall performance. This was helped by the simplicity of the costumes, the lead dancers wore simple white leotards (ok so the men were basically wearing underwear), and the supporting men wore greenish/beige. The result was a visual effect that felt very controlled, clean, and modern. At one point, projections were used on the white poles that made up the set - I couldn't for the life of me tell what these were meant to be though, as I was at a bad angle to see them. But they were pretty cool, so I guess my point here is that they could have thought the logistics of that through a bit better, but overall the lighting design complemented the set and ballet very nicely. The music was a bit odd and got repetitive at times, but overall I liked it.  

Lauren Cuthbertson
© Dave Morgan

I have to write about Lauren Cuthbertson, because, well... Lauren Cuthbertson. This is the first time I saw her dance live, and I was completely blown away. She was mesmerising - the DVDs of Alice and R&J don't do her justice. It's hard to put a finger on what made her so interesting and engaging to watch; the quality of movement was obviously stellar - such fluidity and ease. It doesn't look like she's performing very practiced choreography, if that makes any sense. Because I was so close to the stage, I could actually hear the dancers breathing - my point here is that most of the dancers were just breathing whenever it was convenient, but Lauren's breaths were very controlled. She only let out a loud breath at certain moments in the choreography, which was weird, but it added something. I don't really know how to describe it; it's very much like what we had to do in AGG routines, which I think is why I noticed it.  So her performance felt fresh and new, but also very controlled. Does that make any sense? Yeah I didn't think so. Another one of those that needs to be seen to be understood. Anyway, I loved it, and I'm absolutely dying to see more of her dancing. It's just subtly brilliant.

Edward Watson and Steven McRae were dynamic and exciting; they interacted nicely, fitting together like two puzzle pieces rather than one overpowering the other. The male ensemble made a good support structure; they didn't stand out individually, but moved together as a unit.

I feel like I didn't do either of these pieces justice, but with shorter, unfamiliar pieces, it's difficult to do any hard-hitting analysis. But I hope this gave an idea of what I liked and disliked about Raven Girl and Connectome. I definitely encourage seeing both if you get the chance, and if you ever get the opportunity to see Lauren Cuthbertson and/or Olivia Cowley, you are very lucky indeed. 

I also wanted to share this link to Dave Morgan's photography of these two pieces, the photographs are stunning and give a bit of a glimpse into how visually beautiful and dynamic Raven Girl and Connectome are.